Note: All letters about President
Bush's visit to Calvin for Commencement which are addressed to spark@calvin.edu
or submitted through the Spark
letter web form will be posted on the Spark website. After
Spark magazine covers the President's address to the graduates
in the Fall (September) 2005 edition, some letters representing a variety
of alumni viewpoints will be chosen to be printed in Spark.

* * * * *

I wanted to write an email of support not only for having President Bush
come to speak at this years commencement, but also for the Calvin professors
who voiced displeasure. While I could point out some ironies in the left's
point of view, I think it's most important to applaud how appropriately
both sides conducted themselves publically in this debate.

While I'm sure that you have plenty of people telling you on both sides
(well... one more than the other) that this issue is black and white,
I'd like to be one who encourages you to continue to teach students how
to discern the shades of gray.

This debate is precisely why Calvin exists.
This debate is precisely why Calvin is distinct.
This debate is precisely why Calvin matters.

Keep up the great work.

Send my best wishes to the faculty that are dealing with the "postlude"
of this important ocassion.

Martin Wondergem '93
Grand Rapids, Mich.

* * * * *

Kudos to some of our June graduates and faculty for wearing
buttons at commencement stating that “God is not a Republican or
Democrat.” When posed a question about our duty to pay taxes, Christ
instructed that we render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s. His
wise words were an early lesson in political philosophy on the importance
of a separation of Church and State. We have obligations as citizens,
and taxes are among them. But a central message in this story was that
in order to maintain our spiritual integrity, we must not render unto
Caesar more than is Caesar’s. By allowing the Calvin graduation
podium to be cynically manipulated by Karl Rove for highly partisan purposes,
and in the process displacing and disrespecting one of our own finest
philosophers and interpreters of Christ, I believe that the college did
exactly that. Flag and cross may inspire similar passions, and it may
be tempting to confuse one’s own political interests and allegiances
with those of God. But we should know better. The Bible tells us so.

David deBoer '86
Chicago, Ill.

* * * * *

Just when I thought all the crazies had weighed in with
every possible viewpoint from both right and left, and had those viewpoints
published in the Grand Rapids Press (letters to the editor),
I stumbled upon this website.

President George W. Bush was here. He spoke at commencement.
He didn't embarrass himself or Calvin College. Calvin will survive —
to the amazement of both Democrats and Republicans — with its reputation
intact. Now why can't we all just move on to another topic? Please!

Chuck Vander Sloot '59
Grand Rapids, Mich.

* * * * *

Well, I really didn’t want to see an article in the
press of how 1/3 of the Calvin professors, and 800 alumni and faculty,
took out ads in the G.R. Press opposing our President’s visit to
Calvin. Of the thousands and thousands who were happy to see a rare Christian
President come speak, a few had to be heard grumbling. Why do those who
scream for tolerance of so many non-Christian ideas end up being the least
tolerant of what is good? Maybe you disagree with the President, but don’t
forget, how many of us could take on the burden of the Presidency? Someone
has to do it, and I prefer a Christian man.

Joshua Holden ‘96
Bloomington, Ind.

* * * * *

I am growing increasingly more disgusted with the politically liberal
bent evident at Calvin. Our worldview must always line up with the Bible,
and it seems like some of what I read and hear these days regarding what
profs are doing or saying, what events are taking place, what kind of
a cultural response Calvin is giving on current issues lines up with politically
correct ideology rather than a traditional, conservative, biblical understanding.
The most recent action taken by profs and students regarding President
Bush’s visit was particularly disappointing to me.

Christine Toering Wiebenga ‘98
Hamilton, Mich.

* * * * *

I am disgusted with the liberal bias that is expressed by the faculty—who
are questioning the authority of Scripture. I have withdrawn all financial
support but will continue to pray for the college. I hope the administration
works to bring God-fearing teachers back to campus who understand the
biblical foundation of this once great institution.

Derek Hunderman ‘96
Ada, Mich.

* * * * *

As a Calvin College Alumni now living outside of West Michigan,
I was surprised to see a major article in the New York Times newspaper
(May 22, 2005) chronicling President Bush’s commencement speech.
While opposition was voiced in the Grand Rapids Press prior to the President’s
visit, he was still warmly received by the faculty, students, and families
present at the commencement ceremony. The ability of the Calvin College
community to openly discuss how a Christian faith should play a role in
politics exemplifies the uniqueness and quality of this institution. An
education from Calvin has given me the ability to critically analyze issues
of politics and social justice from a Christian perspective. I’m
proud to see that this strongly held tradition remains an active part
of academic life at my Alma Mater.

Jill O. Helmus Lampen '97
Richmond, Virginia

* * * * *

When told of K. Rove’s having invited Congressperson
V. Ehlers to convey to Calvin President G. Byker the invitation to invite
President G.W. Bush to sing and pray and read K. Rove's commendation of
Rotary International and the Boy Scouts of America and the free-market
wisdom of A. Kuyper in the Calvin Field-House, most Calvin students and
alumni shared with College President Byker his exultation in the prospect.

Of those who scold and even curse the minority who expressed dismay with
President Byker's disinvitation of Professor Wolterstorff so as to accept
the Rove invitation to invite, a remarkable majority invoke an obligation
to be silent about the policies or behavior of "all those in authority
over us."

“The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.” As Shakespeare
probably anticipated, devout non-diabolical ordinary folks have been as
adroit over the centuries with the verbatim of Holy Writ as the Devil
herself.

Some years ago, the devilish ploy damned President Clinton for his adultery
and the lies he told in the failed effort to conceal it. Few if ANY of
the shocked, scripture-citing devout then invoked biblical injunctions
against the very idea of lamenting or deploring the private or public
behavior of “those in authority over us.” On them, the point
must have been lost of the Christian whose sign observed on May 21 that
“When Clinton Lied, No One Died.” One hopes for his soul's
sake that as he sizzled at the stake, Michael Servetus didn't compound
his iniquity by calling into question the divinely ordained fiat of J.
Calvin, then in position of authority over him.

Whether the current President be “sitting” (as Calvin President
Byker has him always doing) or standing or lying or inventing weapons
of mass destruction so as to justify unjustifiable war or signing laws
to over-rule judiciary authority in Florida or to preclude access to health
care for the uncountable poor, thus ensuring the alleviation of their
tax burdens for such devout supporters as those who endow C. Colson chairs
-- his decisions and behavior are as deserving of public scrutiny, as
of freely expressed exhilaration or dismay, as those of any President
in the history of the country.

Although P. de Haan's "conclusion" that “at its heart
the Commencement service was a worship service...” echoes President
Byker's own reminiscence, it's not anti-American OR blasphemous to think
the very idea a silly one.

Bernard van't Hul ‘53
Ann Arbor, Mich.

* * * * *

I have heard a little about the controversy over President
Bush's presence at Commencement. As a donor and alumnus, I want to show
my support to the students and faculty who expressed an opinion contrary
to the college administration. In particular, whatever I may think of
President Bush's visit myself, I think it is a sign of a healthy academic
institution when there is open and honest discussion of any event. It
is one of the things that I valued, deeply, about Calvin when I was a
student, and it is something that I hope continues there. Students should
be challenged to think critically, to question the status quo, and, if
necessary, to protest when they think a wrong is done.

For the record, I nominally supported the invitation to
the President — I think the publicity is good for the college, but
not that good for the particular students. Commencement should be a celebration
of the students, not a celebration of a person who has little to no connection
with the school. However, as an alumnus, it benefits me if people know
about Calvin, and so, like I said, I was not particularly opposed to his
visit.

Anyway, I know that many donors have been upset and angered
by those who opposed the visit — I feel the opposite. This kind
of debate and protest is why I give to Calvin, and why I came to Calvin.

Christy VanArragon Prins '01
Grand Rapids, Mich.

* * * * *

I was excited to hear that President Bush accepted the invitation
to speak at Calvin’s commencement ceremony. Shortly following this
good news, however, I was disappointed and angry to read the letter of
disapproval that was signed by a large number of faculty members. May
I remind them (since they seem to have forgotten) that President Bush
did not force his way onto our campus to promote a political agenda. He
was invited to be a guest speaker and deserved to be treaded as a guest.
Let me also remind them that the purpose of his visit was to honor and
encourage the graduating class of 2005 who worked hard to earn their degrees
as I once did.

The faculty members of Calvin College certainly have a right to express
their opinions, but they also have a responsibility to act as professionals.
Their behavior in my opinion was inappropriate, unprofessional and downright
rude. By selfishly promoting their own agenda, they took the spotlight
off the graduating students and caused it to shine on themselves.

I know there are many faculty members who acted appropriately and professionally
regardless of their political views. It’s just too bad that the
others had to spoil not only this significant event but also the reputation
of Calvin College.

Crystal Langejans Bowman ‘73
Grand Rapids, Mich.

* * * * *

You may well have gotten flack concerning the letter written by several
Calvin professors protesting President Bush's policies. Let it be known
that some of us who are Calvin alumni, like my husband Arthur ('59) and
myself ('60) are proud, proud, proud that these professors had the courage
to speak out. We know at least one of them well. I am sure that all of
them are believing Christians and patriotic Americans. Yet Bush and his
henchmen are trying to brainwash the populace into believing that anyone
who dares to speak against them is NOT Christian and NOT patriotic. The
recent power plays of Bush, Frist, and the totally corrupt DeLay are very
much like the power moves of Hitler. We must not forget that Hitler gained
control of the Bundestag legally, and he got the judiciary to back him
up. Hitler did not take over the country; he was given the country by
the people, yes, the Christians who screamed his praises. If we let Bush
and his cronies persuade enough people that it must be his way or no way,
we will soon lose the democracy for which so many have fought and died.
A thousand cheers to these courageous professors.

Policy: Letters regarding the contents of the magazine
will be considered for publication in Spark unless specifically
marked "not for publication." Correspondence may be shortened
to meet editorial requirements. We will not publish anonymous letters;
however, we may withhold names upon request.

I was appalled when I heard that a neo-fascist-who-prays was selected
as this year's commencement speaker at Calvin. I was tempted to tear up
my diploma and withdraw my millions from the institution, thinking extremism
and money are the only things that can get anyone's attention nowadays.
But I was so proud of the faculty and staff who voiced their dismay in
the Grand Rapids Free Press, and the students who bravely stuck their
necks out with buttons reading: "God is not a Republican or a Democrat,"
(as we know, God is a Calvinist, with leanings toward a nascent universalism-not
an easy thing to fit on a button).

Bully for Calvin.

And next year, Calvin's administration might want to invite someone who
speaks in full sentences-perhaps Nick Wolterstorff, a terrific speaker
who should not be misunderestimated.

Thomas Fiet ‘79
Staatsburg, New York

* * * * *

It is with great shame that I now say I am a Calvin alumna. I'm sure
I'm not alone in being appalled at the rudeness of some of our faculty
(30%, I've read) and students who insulted President Bush on his visit
to Calvin. Such boorishness does not speak well for my alma mater. Free
speech? Yes, at the appropriate time; however, this was in my opinion
not the time or place. Anyone in the position of President of our country
deserves the honor of a warm welcome. Anything less only reflects poorly
on the college.

Dorothy Steensma Goffer '47
Melbourne, Fla.

* * * * *

On my way home from work today, I hear on the radio newscast,
that the President of the United States will be giving the key note address
at this year's graduation. Before I can be pleasantly surprised that my
alma mater has been so honored, the newscaster goes on to say that apparently
over 100 Calvin Professors have signed a letter of protest that the President
will be speaking to our graduates and they will be protesting at graduation
as well.

Now, instead of the story being about Calvin — its
students, its academic excellence, its mission — it will be about
how the faculty of Calvin are against the President of the United States
addressing the graduating class.

Please, before you react with the predictable — You
should be proud of us exercising our first amendment right to petition
the government for a redress of our grievances — think about it.
Look into your own hearts, is this the only way to make your point? Have
you worked through channels? Have you met with your Representative, have
you written the President, have you contributed to people and organizations
that will promote your viewpoint?

So, Professors of Calvin College, I ask you, should this
day be about you, or should it be about our graduates and our school?

David DeZwaan '82
Holland, Mich.

* * * * *

I was appalled and embarrassed to read about the recent faculty protest
against President Bush before his commencement visit. I only attended
one year at Calvin and have long since left the Christian Reformed Church,
however I still care about Calvin's reputation. Unfortunately, the media
attention on these professors will only serve to do the college harm.
Frankly, these published objections came off sounding moralistic, smug
and "holier than thou." Not to mention, of course, it was extremely
small-minded and BAD MANNERS. What were these professors thinking? Furthermore,
being a Christian institution, is it Christian to label another's actions
as un-Christian? Didn't Christ say something about not throwing stones
before picking out the log in one's own eye? One of the reasons I left
the CRC was due to its sense of superiority over other religions. I have
found the Episcopal church to be far less judgmental. What college wouldn't
be proud to have ANY President speak at its commencement? I am re-thinking
any further financial support to Calvin.

Ellen Strikwerda Borman ‘73
McLean, Virg.

* * * * *

The day after commencement, I couldn’t stop flipping on the TV
to see if CNN was again showing the President of the United States giving
an address with the Calvin College name and seal in the background (and
my uncle and aunt, the Kalamazoo Bos’s, seated as distinguished
alumni right behind him!)

As someone who has been dismayed by many (actually, most) of the current
Presidents’ policies I was equally pleased to hear CNN giving prominent
mention to the protest letter signed by faculty. The impression that Calvin
made was, in my mind, perfect-as a place where serious discussion of political
and religious issues of the day can be held, but also a place not easily
co-opted by politicians of the day from either side.

I have heard rumors that, despite this public relations coup, some alumni
are threatening to withhold funds from the college due to the perceived
liberalism of the faculty. As faculty at a university that knows something
about the left political flank, this accusation does not ring true for
me. My Calvin education instilled in me a respect for tradition and intellectual
discipline that has served me well working in academic fields that are
sometimes too eager to chase after the latest trend. But the really radical
idea I picked up at Calvin is that religion is something to be taken seriously,
rather than something to be dismissed (as do most true ‘liberals’)
or hidden away in anti-intellectual conclaves (the fundamentalist alternative).
The desire to truly integrate faith and scholarship has caused me nothing
but trouble in my academic career. For this I am also grateful. I also
wish Calvin the best in its fundraising efforts. Education of the type
Calvin is trying to provide is not cheap! (Religious indoctrination, by
contrast, is much less expensive.)

Nathan Bos ‘91
Ann Arbor, Mich.

* * * * *

Many graduates recall who spoke at their commencement. Far fewer remember
what the speaker actually said. I do. The year was 1980 and the commencement
speaker at Calvin's graduation that year was Prof. Nicholas Wolterstorff.

He turned a common phrase to make his memorable point: "Don't just
do something. Stand there." By this he meant don't simply pursue
engaging employment and the American Dream, but above all, stand grounded
on the rich principles of the Christian faith.

Those principles I learned in denominational Christian Schools all the
way through Calvin College, emphasized an all encompassing view of life,
to include the rich life of the mind, with the purpose of furthering God's
redemptive work in whatever situation I may find myself.

While this world view certainly includes public service and the vast
possibilities of political office, I was surprised to hear that the College
has welcomed as this year's commencement speaker our country's President,
who surely seeks the venue of a particular kind of Christian community
for political gain. There is little honor, if any, in doing so.

Please do not rob the class of 2005 of the wisdom of your originally
scheduled speaker Nicholas Wolterstorff by substituting the political
opportunism of Bush's speech writers. In the words of another prominent
republican of the late twentieth century, "Just say 'no'" to
President Bush.

Mary Huissen Marissen '80
Swarthmore, Penn.

* * * * *

When I learned the President Bush was going to speak at the commencement
exercises at Calvin College, I was proud of my alma mater. However, following
his speach, a article appeared in my local paper, the Baltimore Sun,
that made me embarrased to be an alumni of Calvin. The article told how
one-third of the facult openly protested his coming and on two occasions,
the Grand Rapids Press ran adds from Calvin's faculty and students
proclaiming that President Bush violated deeply held principles at Calvin
College. I have no doubt that George Bush is President of the United States
because our Lord ordained it. How dare Calvin College protest an elected
man of God. After reading this article I am ashamed of the Calvin community.
As Christians we are called to pray for our leaders. I hope that other
Calvin alumni share may concerns and will pray for Calvin as well as our
nations leaders during this difficult time.

Susan DeMeester Gearhart '89
Baltimore, Md.

* * * * *

As a Calvin alumni I was very dissapointed at the responses of some
of the proffesors and students during the president's visit and speech
to the graduates at the commencment this year. Where have the morals and
covictions of the Christian Reformed Church gone to? The liberal statements
which were given to CNN and Fox were comletely out of kilter from the
stands when I was at Calvin.

Edward S. Smith '58
Dublin, Ga.

* * * * *

For educators to make political statements regarding the
appearance at a commencement of a sitting President was not only an embarrassment,
but showed a total disrespect that can only hurt Calvin in the long run.
These individuals only show the hypocrisy in their statements relative
to what they expound in the classroom. If they really followed the precepts
that the Bible teaches, they would realize that Christ never tried to
embarrass or disrespect his enemies in an arena of life that could be
detrimental to the ultimate goal of why he was on this earth. I'm thankful
that my daughter graduated from Calvin years ago because if she was entering
at the present day, I would have strong reservations about her going there.

Gil Vanderkraats '58
Huntington, West Virginia

* * * * *

I am a 65 year old white Christian male. I attended a small Christian
college just like you. You have every right to march, write letters, and
take out full page ads in the newspaper protesting President Bush's actions,
or whatever else you wish to protest. You can thank the United States
Military for this.

I do however, think that your plan to conduct these protests while the
President is ON campus reveals a lack of respect for the office of President
of the United States. More importantly, it reveals a total lack of just
plain class. I would expect this juvenile behavior at some state university,
or at an eastern effete elitist Ivy League school. I expect better from
you.

Your parents must be very embarrassed. Speaking for myself, I am disgusted
with you.

Kenneth W. Weigel
Edmonds, Wash.

* * * * *

I, and I'm sure many alumni and students, are disappointed to note the
newspaper story telling us that President Bush will speak at Calvin's
graduation ceremony this year.

There are so many reasons to see this as a problematic and essentially
reactionary choice in these troubled times of war, deficits and contiued
choices by a President who transparently favor his friends and those who
need no more favors in this nation while putting our solidiers and many
outsider groups at a greater disadvantge.

Ron Vander Kooi '60
Arvada, Colo.

* * * * *

Calvin College is my alma mater. I am proud of her and consider the alumni,
faculty, and students to be my college family. The day I graduated was
one of the highlights of my life. It must have been a great honor and
thrill to have the President of the United States speak at graduation.
I feel a sense of gratitude to all of the people who worked hard to make
this possible.

At Calvin I learned to think, and that meant gathering information, exploring
thoughts, wondering about options, and remembering the past to try to
foresee the future that would result from my present actions. As I read
news reports about the 2005 graduation, I have feelings of sadness about
how some of the faculty inspired a media circus concerning President Bush’s
visit to this graduation. I wonder if this is anti-Calvin, anti-Bush or
anti-American behavior. I wonder if the actions by these faculty and students
are a suitable way to thank the many donors who made great programs, buildings,
and scholarships available for students and faculty. I wonder if protesting
is the present mode for carrying on academic and intellectual discussion.
I wonder how you can critique a person’s speech before it is given.
I wonder what enables a professor to publicly proclaim that his ideas
are more important than the institution that he represents. I wonder who
is paying for the promotion and the two-day ad spread in the GR Press.
I wonder if the feelings of the relatives of the graduates who made a
great effort and traveled far to be able to witness this joyous occasion
were ever considered. It was stated that the protest was being done for
religious reasons, and I wonder if all involved experienced “the
joy of the Lord.” I feel very sad that certain members of my college
family greeted The President of the United States of America with a lack
of respect.

Mary Jane De Weerd Byker '59 MAT'80
Calvin CALL Student 2004, 2005

* * * * *

It was with great concern and dismay that I watched the local news last
week, reporting that President George W. Bush is scheduled to be the commencement
speaker at Calvin College’s graduation this coming May.

Commencement is a special time for the graduates and their families,
celebrating an achievement of four (or more) years of hard work and sacrifice
by both the graduates and their families. The featured commencement speaker
should be a person that has intimate knowledge of the academic process
and the institution that has graduated the class. At Calvin, the speaker
also has the unique and special responsibility to challenge the class
as they go out into God’s world and be a part of Christ’s
redemptive work. On all of these points, I seriously question the president’s
qualifications as commencement speaker. I was dumbfounded when I learned
that Dr. Wolterstorff was also considered, and is highly qualified to
speak at Calvin’s commencement, but passed over in favor of the
president.

Politicians, especially presidents, take every opportunity to speak about
their agenda. Just last week while addressing a group in Washington DC
about social security, the president urged the senate into action on the
nomination of John Bolton to the UN. What would keep the president from
doing this from the rostrum at Calvin College’s Field house? Would
it be appropriate to have such a speech during Calvin’s commencement?

But beside all of these reservations, what about the president’s
record as our leader of our country? He inherited a budget surplus and
now we have record deficit spending. He led us into a war under false
pretenses, a war that doesn’t come close to measuring up to any
reasonable “Just War” standard. The execution of this war
has not been done justly, from the prisoner of war abuses, the lack of
justice for the detainees, and the extension of tours of duty for National
Guardsmen and women. The president clearly is more concerned with the
affluent in our society than the poor. Every Old Testament prophet to
John the Baptist would have a field day with the leadership of this president
and for what he stands. I won’t even get started on the “importance”
of education in his federal budget, nor will I take up space discussing
his environmental record. It leaves me very perplexed as to why would
Calvin ask him to come. What would he speak about, “family values”,
“faith based initiatives,” the need for judges who don’t
legislate from the bench? Let him speak of such issues at Bob Jones University
or Liberty.

On the behalf of all alumni who are concerned about this invitation,
I ask that President Byker reconsider the commencement speaker choice.

Thomas C. Huissen '85
Fremont, Mich.

* * * * *

I want to thank you for taking the time to forward Calvin College’s
official response to what I hope are many alumni who are voicing their
concerns about the commencement exercise at Calvin. The order of events
and who was involved in the decision to have President Bush give the commencement
address was helpful information and also gives me insight into what seems
to be the priorities of this institution.

As I tried to express in my first letter, I can only reemphasize my concern
about who is chosen to give the commencement address to Calvin’s
graduating seniors, their families, and the Calvin community. In your
communiqué you listed a great many people from a variety of walks
of life, vocations, perspectives, and world views who have spoken at the
Calvin. This is important and necessary to help educate and enlighten
all who attend such events. Inviting the standing President of the United
States, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and a person such as John
Perkins to speak at Calvin and share what they believe is important is
appropriate and should be pursued. The opportunity to hear and ask questions
of such people is important, and Calvin’s January Series is an example
of a fantastic format for such dialogue. I know that Chief Justice Rehnquist
was originally asked to speak at the series, but he turned down the opportunity.
Commencement isn’t the venue that would give this type of interaction,
give and take between the speaker and the audience.

Commencement should be a celebration of God’s faithfulness to his
people at the institution of Calvin College and all of those who are involved
in graduating the class. The speakers should have an intimate knowledge
of this place called Calvin and its “…distinctively Christian,
academically excellent liberal arts (program) that shapes minds for the
intentional participation in the renewal of all things…” These
are your words. An alumnus, professor (current, former, emeritus),
or some other member of the Calvin family has more to offer than anyone
outside of the Calvin community. If an outsider such as the current President
of the United States comes to speak, there will be the temptation to use
the opportunity to get his political message across. There is no time,
nor is it appropriate at commencement for a question and answer, rebuttal,
dialogue, or debate about the speaker’s address.

I ... read the president’s remarks that were given at Concordia.
I have also read some of the works of Dr. Wolterstorff. Yet you believe
that what the president will say will have a more profound and lasting
effect on the class of 2005?

If you want Calvin College to make an impact on culture, or to make known
the name of this institution to a larger population of the world, do so
by continuing to shape the minds and hearts of young people. Reaching
to a broader audience and making the name of Calvin College known to more
people by inviting the famous and infamous to speak at commencement is
the wrong means to reach a suspect end.

Thomas C. Huissen '85
Fremont, Mich.

* * * * *

Just wanted to let you know that some ex-Calvinites are
a bit worried about the many disgruntled Calvinites out there in Michigan
who have spread controversy over the upcoming commencement proceedings
by de-stabilizing those whose college has invited the President of the
U.S. to speak to them. Not that one can't disagree with the President.
You can respect one and disagree with him at the same time. However, it
would seem to me that these people would not send a petition of one sort
or another to a Pastor they didn't agree with. And some of these people
probably have evangelical friends whose theology the CRC absolutely disagrees
with and they probably wouldn't gather 100 plus people to send them a
"we don't like you" letter. As we are called to hold our Spiritual
Leaders in high regard, we are also called to place our civil leaders
in high regard, to pray for them and to respect them...especially when
the that nation's civil leader is an overt Christian man. It's hard to
believe that so many educated people aren't thinking about what they are
saying! Both sides of the fence have their fallacies. However, one side
would have us depend fully on the government so that we do not have to
fully depend on our God. One side would have social justice mean Government
entitlements, the other would rather see religious institutions, homes,
individuals and other charity organizations do it. One side would rather
not see us defend human life, defend democracy and defend social atrocities
and the other would have us divert our eyes from it. Bottom line is this
man is our President, and these people who have shown the President the
dark side of Christianity, are offering an awesome commencement the chance
at mediocrity. These people are covering their graduating students with
a blanket of controversy. These people are teaching their graduating students
that they can go out into the world unsure of who they are, unsure of
who their president is, unsure of the status of the world today and unsure
of how to deal with it in a respectful, Christian manner. What they will
know how to be is an activist. Great work, Calvin College.

Rick Elgersma
West Des Moines, Iowa

* * * * *

President G.W. Bush will be regarded as one of the greatest presidents
in the history of the our country. He has guided us through some of the
most difficult times with integrity, perserverence, and a commitment to
do what's right, in the face of much opposition from his political and
moral opponents. He has sought support of others, but doesn't act on the
basis of it. Most of all, he has restored a sense of morality and dignity
to the oval office.

What a wonderful opportunity for Calvin College to have a sitting President
speak at it's spring graduation. This event should have been welcomed
by the entire community. Rather, the front page news this morning is that
a "Christian" college in West Michigan protested the President's
visit. What a shame.

These protests, based on false and ignorant points of view, are a clear
indication that many Calvin faculty and students are influenced primarily
by the mainstream media, rather than their moral convictions. Any true
Christian would support the removal of an evil dictator and the end of
rape rooms, torture chambers, and the slaughter of thousands of innocent
people. Christians are called to action, not to silence. G.W. Bush should
be commended and praised for his strong leadership. The "welcome"
that he was provided at Calvin College was improper and undeserved. What
a shame.

As a native of Grand Rapids, I am absolutely ashamed of Calvin College.
What was once a jewel of the community has degraded to a spineless, amoral
liberal arts college. What a shame.

Phil Harwood
Farmington Hills, Mich.

* * * * *

[responding to an e-mail from a fellow alum] I've just read your remarkable
stream-of-consciousness yawp calling your fellow protesters to arms against
George Bush's pending appearance at Calvin College's commencement, which
apparently has you and other media-savvy folks agog with excitement. As
a Calvinite (Class of 1969) advising the Pentagon, I am outraged that
members of the Calvin community feel entitled to treat a devout Christian
president with the venom, the contempt and the derision — like graffit
artists spray-painting a reeking underpass — that you so crudely
convey.

As expected, your e-mail call to arms conveys the usual Hard Left trope
that moral postruring is ALL. It's a heady mix of teeny-bopper self-absorption,
sorta-'Christian' moral prancing and preening, hilarious intellectual
loopiness (like good ol' frat boys halfway through a kegger trying to
sound intellectual) and the usual snarky "Take THAT, BushCheneyRove
!" defiance - safely expressed, as the Left is wont to do, via T-shirts
saying mean things. I'm reminded of howler monkeys hooting overhead in
the trees and shitting on the good guys below, the adults, the nameless
Marine grunts sweating away wordlessly fighting evil, killing car bombers,
protecting the innocent and rescuing God's children from death.

I graduated from Calvin in 1969 and ended up on Reagan's defense transition
team. I helped launch 'Star Wars' on the Hill -- because, as a Calvinist,
I held to the moral primacy of non-retaliatory self-defense over nuclear
revenge against enemy non-combatants. (I was profiled
in Calvin's alumni magazine Spark for June, 2004.) As a Hill
staffer, I experienced a nuclear-war scare with Soviet missiles in the
air while in a Colorado Springs restaurant with an Air Force general.
I realized in a heart-stopping moment the hair-raising, crushing responsibilities
that a president lives with every minute — because the nuclear-war
'red phone' on the table in front of me there went directly to a similar
unit sitting right next to the Oval Office.

I worry that Bush's appearance at Calvin will trigger the usual moral
exhibitionism and holier-than-thou preening by self-annointed renders-of-robes
and noisy anathematizers of other Christians — the latter including
a devout Christian named George W. Bush. I know that a lot of Calvin alumni
and faculty don't care for him or his party and politics — but I
am particularly sensitive to the complaints about his going to war with
Saddam Hussein, which some of these critics equate to a pact with evil.

There is distressingly little appreciation among these Calvin protesters,
whom I would have expected to be far better than most at meshing Christian
beliefs with ethics of state and state behavior, of the incredible complexities,
the inability to predict (much less control) events, that call on Christian
policymakers to make huge life-and-death decisions on the basis of terribly
imperfect information. That unfortunately will be all that they will ever
have, as we've just learned from the Iraq war, despite our cultural fetishism
about making decisions amid a torrent of "information plenty."

I say this in part because for the last three years I have worked with
the defense officials who planned this war and who have worked long hours
to protect our guys against suicide attacks, car bombs, ambushes and everything
else Zarqawi and company have come up with. The decision to go to war
was not made casually. Those in your crowd who see Bush's decision to
take down Saddam as opportunistic or driven by 'Pax Americana' nostalgia
or by personal, religious or domestic-political motives should have seen
the genuine anxiety in the Pentagon, the grim acceptance of the prospect
of heavy allied and Iraqi civilian casualties, if Saddam decided to use
the chemical and biological weapons that we — and every intelligence
agency in the world — believed he had in hand. Indeed, one reason
why our leading forces took such huge chances in outrunning their supply
lines was because rapid movement, even in bad weather, was by far the
best way to deny Iraqi targeteers the precise information on our forces'
position that they needed before they could use such weapons against us.

I keep thinking back on the Vietnam War, which framed my time at Calvin
(1964-1969). In 1967, at the height of that war, a laws-of-warfare theologian
at Princeton named Paul Ramsey wrote an essay called "Counting the
Costs." In it he pointed to Christ's parable about a king who, threatened
with invasion, begins to estimate the cost of building ramparts and defenses,
not knowing precisely the strength or intentions of his adversary. Jesus
noted that this action requires the king to know as precisely as possible
his enemy's forces and intent — so that he can figure out whether
to keep building or to offer terms.

The message? Even the most prescient, most devout, most well intentioned
and Godly-minded Christian leader or diplomat CANNOT KNOW IN ADVANCE WHAT
WILL WORK. And yet he does not have the luxury of inaction, of "kicking
the can down the road" to the next president or turning it over to
the UN, etc. Instead, an American president like Bush going up against
madmen like Saddam must take forceful decisions amid appalling uncertainties
and information blackouts. Like Eisenhower, who the night before D-Day
in a howling storm rolled the dice for a "Go" decision on ONE
weather forecast, a president facing a go-to-war decision cannot (and
never will) fully know ALL the consequences of his decisions — or
even if he has all the right information.

If Ramsey's framing of the moral calculus of wartime leadership holds
true for today, THEN IT IS NOT JUST MISGUIDED BUT MORALLY DEPRAVED for
fellow Christians to pillory and castigate those brave Christian statesmen
as misguided, incompetent or even deliberately untruthful for going to
war or making decisions during war. This is especially the case because
these opportunistic critics enjoy the morally luxurious, after-the-fact
vantage point called "Monday morning quarterbacking."

It is this daunting lack of predictability that Bush's team has had to
struggle with. On WMD, for example, intelligence indicators suggested
that Saddam had NOT dismantled what we and the UN inspectors had found
over 1991-1998 to be a stunningly large program for "weapons of mass
destruction" (WMD). Not only did US intelligence agencies conclude
in spring, 2003 that Saddam still had WMD, but so did all the foreign
intelligence services that we worked with, from the Israelis to the Europeans.
Yet, as everyone knows, we didn't find what every service had predicted
we'd find. WHERE DID THEY GO? We still don't know but there are indications
they were smuggled out of Iraq. Still, given what we knew when we knew
it, is it morally justified for Calvin protesters to pillory Bush as a
war-monger or liar — per last year's common refrains? NO.

I wish there were at least a rudimentary appreciation among Calvin protesters
of what it's like for Christian statesmen to face appalling decisions
amid great uncertainty. Because over the next few months, Bush's team
must decide in the face of dangers that dwarf those of spring, 2003:

...Iran: it is on the verge of nuclear warheads for its indigenously
manufactured ballistic missiles. It refuses to stop its program —
and the Europeans give every appearance of caving in to its resistance.
All it takes is ONE Iranian missile fired from a ship (which they have
done) that detonates in low earth orbit (which they have also demonstrated)
to create an electromagnetic pulse that will burn out the electronics
and relays on which a modern economy (Italy? Britain? Israel? The US?)
depends, causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damage. With Iran,
there soon will be a no-kidding point of no return: world politics will
be transformed for the worse by Iranian nukes. So — with diplomacy
failing, WHAT DO WE DO? Does Calvin, as an intellectual center of gravity,
have anything useful to say to the White House on this harrowing dilemma?

...North Korea: led by a psychopath — an Idi Amin with nukes —
this nation has conducted live tests of chemical and biological weapons
on prisoners, according to recent defectors who ran these tests. The goal?
To determine how much is needed to kill the population of Seoul, a city
of more than one million just 20 miles from the Demilitarized Zone. North
Korea refuses to shut down its nuclear program — and now, as a result,
Japan is talking about major defense rearmament — and THAT will
unnerve the Chinese. Again — does Calvin have anything useful to
say to our leaders?

...China: despite its courting of Taiwan's opposition party, China is
slowly moving into position for a lightning (24-36 hours) grab of Taiwan,
with the intent of moving so fast the US would have no time to react.
Could it do so with 600+ missiles to call on for a massive barrage to
decapitate Taiwan's government? Yes. Would it dare to do so before the
2008 Beijing Olympics? Well placed Navy analysts say Yes.

To repast: would Calvin have anything useful to say to Christian decision-makers
facing these daunting challenges? Certainly its protesters do not. Do
the college and its seminary have anything useful to say in terms of systematic,
sustained ethical inquiry into extremely tough moral challenges? I wonder.

Let me close with a personal story. The enormity of what our leaders
face (and my biggest motivation to promote missile defense) came home
to me in mid-1982 at a crowded lunch table in a Colorado Springs restaurant
with Gen. James Hartinger, the Air Force general in charge of NORAD (North
American Aerospace Defense Command). NORAD's command center, with its
famous nuclear-war "red phone" and wall-size display of missile
and bomber tracks heading toward North America, is buried in the heart
of Cheyenne Mountain. NORAD commanders at all times are accompanied by
an aide carrying the "nuclear football": a special phone tied
in at all times with the watch staff inside that mountain — and
to the White House and Strategic Air Command (SAC). If missiles are detected
heading to the US, NORAD's commander is notified in seconds and asked
whether to tell the White House and SAC that a nuclear attack was underway.

I had tracked NORAD's command-post upgrades and missile-attack early-warning
systems as the defense staffer for the local congressman, who sat on the
House Armed Services Committee. A few months before I joined him, a NORAD
watch crew had accidentally run a missile-attack training tape on the
wall display and thrown Washington and the Strategic Air Command's bomber
force into a frenzy for a few minutes. Also, I had earlier worked for
a corporate strategic-analysis group that 'played' the US nuclear-war
plan against its Soviet counterpart (we always lost). There I tracked
Soviet arms racing and their big nuclear-first-strike exercises. I knew
what went on inside Cheyenne Mountain and at the Strategic Air Command's
command post in Omaha.

Without warning, Gen. Hartinger's portable "red phone" went
off — and my heart lurched into my throat. Here I was, supposedly
your professional Hill staffer who knew it was probably just a Soviet
test shot. Yet I was paralyzed, my stomach in knots. The disembodied voice
of NORAD's watch officer came over the speakerphone: a Soviet missile
sub had just launched two ballistic missiles off the Kamchatka Peninsula,
what should the general tell Washington? I realized that if he said "Positive"
all HELL would break loose. The president would be yanked out of the Oval
Office and flown by helicopter to a special Boeing 747 — the airborne
National Command Post — waiting at nearby Andrews Air Force Base.
B-52s and their tankers would start rolling down runways, our missile
subs would be ordered to firing depth. Within minutes, Soviet SS-18s and
SS-19s would descend on our missile silos in North Dakota and Montana:
a first strike the Soviets rehearsed in periodic exercises. The seconds
ticked by. The general chewed on his cigar and compared notes with his
watch staff about previous sub firings. Then he said "Negative"
and hung up the phone. I started breathing again.

What really hit me was that American presidents for more than 40 years
lived with the potential for this general's phone call. Bush lives with
this every minute of every day. But does he get a thimbleful of useful
moral advice, any guidance in the Paul Ramsey class, from all the Christian
intellectual centers around the US? I doubt it. More to the point, is
there even one nanogram of interest among Calvin's protesters of the horrific
moral dilemmas that Bush must weigh every day as president, the kind that
would intimidate a Churchill? I doubt it.

While there are those who feel strongly about Bush's decisions, remember
this: he is a fellow Christian — and as Paul reminds us in Romans
13, he and we all bear special obligations before God.. What I and others
can reasonably request of you and fellow Calvinites is that you forego
the contempt and derision, doff the T-shirts and start acting like adults
— heck, like Christians, for that matter.